Post: Crysis 2 Looks & Runs Better on 360
Options
03-23-2011, 04:10 AM
#1
420
Kush Friendly
Crysis 2 Better For the 360?
You must login or register to view this content.
Source: You must login or register to view this content. // By: 420 // March 22nd, 2011.
You must login or register to view this content.
Source: You must login or register to view this content. // By: 420 // March 22nd, 2011.
According to an IGN reviewer, Arthur Gies or better known as aegies, claims that the Xbox 360 version of Crysis 2 overpowers the PS3 version.
A couple question were asked by members from the mind channel, and here is what went down:
Originally posted by another user
Gvaz [Questioner]: "No, it clearly has better lighting (Sun Rays/God Rays, shadowing, lighting) and AF. Even if all things are the same, those are implemented features. However the tradeoff is that it's at the "stage 1" HD resolution of 720 and the 360 doesn't have those features and is at 1080. I don't know what the frame rate is like.
Either way, if you're wanting to know which one is the better one technologically wise, that'd be the PS3. If you're wanting one that displays natively at 1080, then that'd be the 360. It's up to you which of these is more important."
Gies [Reviewer]: "You. Are. Wrong. No matter how many times you keep saying it. The 360 version runs better and has more going on. The texture filtering is the only thing that might be better on PS3. And I say that with retail copies of both sitting on my desk."
Shurs [Questioner]: "I realize he's under NDA, but if he feels he can pop into this thread to tell us 360 version is the best console version, he could at least tell us why."
Gies [Reviewer]: "From the levels I'm allowed to talk about from last week's preview embargo, the Xbox 360 version maintains its framerate better, has better lighting on characters in particular, and appears to support SSAO in places that it isn't apparent in the PS3 version. This is in addition to the ps3 version being more "stretched." This causes more aliasing, but it also just looks kind of weird at times. It's still a great looking game though."
[/COLOR][/font]
Either way, if you're wanting to know which one is the better one technologically wise, that'd be the PS3. If you're wanting one that displays natively at 1080, then that'd be the 360. It's up to you which of these is more important."
Gies [Reviewer]: "You. Are. Wrong. No matter how many times you keep saying it. The 360 version runs better and has more going on. The texture filtering is the only thing that might be better on PS3. And I say that with retail copies of both sitting on my desk."
Shurs [Questioner]: "I realize he's under NDA, but if he feels he can pop into this thread to tell us 360 version is the best console version, he could at least tell us why."
Gies [Reviewer]: "From the levels I'm allowed to talk about from last week's preview embargo, the Xbox 360 version maintains its framerate better, has better lighting on characters in particular, and appears to support SSAO in places that it isn't apparent in the PS3 version. This is in addition to the ps3 version being more "stretched." This causes more aliasing, but it also just looks kind of weird at times. It's still a great looking game though."
[/COLOR][/font]
03-23-2011, 03:14 PM
#12
DevilishStyles
Keeper
It's no surprise that an IGN writer would say the Xbox version would look better. How about you guys go read the comparisons on Lens of Truth. They are known to shit on the PS3 at times and couldn't help but to acknowledge that the PS3 version indeed looks better. The PS3 demo was most likely a port of the Xbox demo and hence the disgusting graphics and performance. I would share my comparisons but my Xbox is connected on component HD, not HDMI.
03-23-2011, 04:12 PM
#13
Sert
Al Capone, Jr.
Funny, I have a source here that says the complete opposite. How would it make sense that an inferior console could display a very high demanding graphics game better? Think about it, can an xbox play a blu ray? no. Can an xbox display in 1080p? no. Check this article out for the opposite of this thread.... You must login or register to view this content.
03-23-2011, 04:43 PM
#15
-Skyline
Anonymous
I wouldn't trust IGN, they have a known history of being biased towards the 360 and Xbox.
Some examples from quotes:
Back in 2007 they gave a review of Skate, they gave a score of 9.0 for the 360 version, and just 8.8 for the PS3 version... and the reason, they say, is because of the graphical difference... well I'm sorry but do you see ANY difference between the 2?
You must login or register to view this content.
If anything the PS3 version looks about 1% better, the floor texture and just look over at the pool, 360 has jaggies... PS3 has none, wonder what IGN was looking at when they reviewed it?
Anyway, the link that Re-Insertion just gave ^ is from Crytek themselves, and I'd trust them more than a snotty reviewer from IGN.
Some examples from quotes:
Originally posted by VGChartz
So upon reading on IGN's website that Final Fantasy XIII got a 8.9 on the PS3 I checked the 360 version 8.9... I thought for a second, the 360 was inferior...I read it many times on different sites across the internet and even youtube videos. So why was there no seperate review for the definitive version on the PS3 and the inferior version on the 360?
Originally posted by VGChartz
It's been awhile but I remember the title of their seperate GTA:San Andreas review for the Xbox was "Finally San Andreas doesn't look awful". Of course, they'll glad bash PS2-PS3 version and do serperate reviews if they notice the least bit of glitching, popups. Of course, when the PS3 is the definitive version and the 360 mass compression techniques to fit it on a disc(even multiple discs) cause a loss of detail they only do one review. Why? They don't want the 360 to take any heat.
Back in 2007 they gave a review of Skate, they gave a score of 9.0 for the 360 version, and just 8.8 for the PS3 version... and the reason, they say, is because of the graphical difference... well I'm sorry but do you see ANY difference between the 2?
If anything the PS3 version looks about 1% better, the floor texture and just look over at the pool, 360 has jaggies... PS3 has none, wonder what IGN was looking at when they reviewed it?
Anyway, the link that Re-Insertion just gave ^ is from Crytek themselves, and I'd trust them more than a snotty reviewer from IGN.
The following 2 users say thank you to -Skyline for this useful post:
03-23-2011, 06:28 PM
#18
420
Kush Friendly
Originally posted by Rebecca
Why didnt you include that the console version sucks dick compared to the pc.. :carling:
Originally posted by Insertion
Funny, I have a source here that says the complete opposite. How would it make sense that an inferior console could display a very high demanding graphics game better? Think about it, can an xbox play a blu ray? no. Can an xbox display in 1080p? no. Check this article out for the opposite of this thread.... You must login or register to view this content.
Because I haven't tested it my self, that's why quotes were used. Opinionated story from the point of view of an IGN reviewer.
The following 2 users say thank you to 420 for this useful post:
Copyright © 2026, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.
